Question background:

Convolving the reflectivity coefficients with an extracted wavelet produces the microseismic traces. On the other hand, deconvolving the wavelet with the seismic traces should obviously give us back the reflectivity coefficients.

After processing the attached .sgy file in Matlab using SeisLab_2.01, a seismic object was produced and it contained a matrix named "traces". The SeisLab toolkit also has a wavelet extraction function, and so I used that to extract a wavelet from these traces.

Since I had the traces in the segy files and an extracted wavelet, I deconvoluted them and it produced the attached graph 1, where each row represents a separate geophone output. Picture 2 is a just a closer look at each one individually, and picture 3 and 4 is putting all the deconvolutions in one graph.

However, I am doubting that what's produced from this deconvolution of the wavelet and traces is actually the reflectivity coefficients, because the reflectivity coefficients should have values between -1 and +1 (Unless I am misunderstanding that). Thus, to experiment, I assumed that what I have in the segy file is actually the reflectivity coefficients, and so I convoluted these values for one of the geophones (Assuming they are reflectivity coefficients) with the wavelet and got figure 5.

My questions are:

1) Assuming that the deconvolution of the wavelet with the traces produces the reflectivity coefficients, why does deconvoluting the extracted wavelet with the "traces" not produce graphs with values +1, -1?

2) Looking at the values of the seismic traces, could they actually represent the reflectivity coefficeints instead?

3) Is there a better approach on how I should be processing segy files to have more valuable data?

If adding more information would help answer the question please mention it and I would happily do so. Thanks,